Reported Cases

Clem v. Corbeau , 284 F.3d 543 (4th Cir. 2002): U.S. Court of Appeals affirmed position of Mr. Roche that his client was entitled to jury trial as to whether police office acted reasonably in shooting Mr. Roche's client three times when he was unarmed.

Brownlee v. Schwartz, 253 Va. 159, 482 S.E.2d 827 (1997): This is a malpractice action brought by Mr. Roche on behalf of a patient against a physician and his corporation who had improperly managed the patient's care following his recovery from prostate surgery. The Jury returned a verdict for 1.85 million dollars. The defendant corporation appealed on the grounds that the verdict should be reduced to the one million dollar cap on malpractice actions in Virginia. The Virginia Supreme Court upheld the 1.85 million dollar verdict finding that the evidence presented by Mr. Roche at trial proved that the defendant corporation was not properly registered and therefore not entitled to the protection of the cap.

Robert E. Kuga, et ux v. U.S., ED VA, No. 86-0022-A: This is a suit where Mr. Roche represented a taxpayer in an action brought against the Internal Revenue Service in Federal Court in Alexandria wherein the Internal Revenue Service had improperly denied certain business deductions for taxpayer. The Court in that case ruled in favor of the taxpayer and judgment was entered accordingly.

Berwyn Fuel, Inc. v. Emerson Hogan, Jr., 399 A.2d 79; (D.C. Ct of App 1979): In this case Mr. Roche addressed the issue of whether the D.C. Superior Court had personal jurisdiction over the defendant. On appeal, the D.C. Court of Appeals affirmed the position asserted by Mr. Roche.

Bowers v. May, 233 Va. 411 (Supreme Court of Virginia 1997): In this personal injury action, the issue on appeal was whether a jury instruction should have been given by the trial court on the issue of negligence on the part of the Plaintiff. On appeal, the Virginia Supreme Court agreed with the position asserted by Mr. Roche.

Beverly Ann Hall v. Ford Enterprises, Ltd., 445 A.2d 610; (D.C. Ct. of App. 1982): In this case the issue asserted was whether a victim of a criminal assault could assert a claim against a security agency for alleged negligent misrepresentation that may have contributed to the criminal assault. The D.C. Court of Appeals affirmed the position asserted by Mr. Roche.

Fred Tarpley, Sr. v. Raymond J. Green, 221 U.S. App. D.C. 227, 684 F.2d 1 (U.S. App. 1982): In this suit brought against several local police officers, Mr. Roche defended these police officers asserting that they had not overstepped their bounds and that they were acting within the proper dictates of the search warrant that governed their search in this instance. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia agreed with the position asserted by Mr. Roche.

James Butler, Charlotte Butler v. Bobbie S. Person, et.al., 204 U.S. App. D.C. 254, 636 F.2d 526 (U.S. App. D.C. 1980): In this personal injury action, the issue on appeal was whether non-compliance with certain court orders was a basis for sanctions against the party that did not comply. In this case, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia agreed with the position asserted by Mr. Roche.

Administrator of the Estate of Daniel Huston v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company, 99 F.3d 132 (U.S. Court of Appeals, 4th Circ. 1996): This was a wrongful death action brought against State Farm Insurance Company to obtain insurance coverage for a gentleman who was the victim of a car jacking resulting in his death. In this case, Mr. Roche represented the estate of the young man that had been killed in this car jacking and argued to the U.S. Court of Appeals that insurance coverage should be found to exist for this incident since it did involve the use of a motor vehicle. The Court of Appeals disagreed with the position asserted by Mr. Roche and the insurance company prevailed in its position of denying coverage.

Howard & Hoffman, Inc. v. Hartford Accident & Indemnity Company, 634 A.2d 1214, (D.C. App. 1993): Arbitration proceeding involving insurance coverage. The D.C. Court of Appeals on this case agreed with the position asserted by Mr. Roche.

Lackman v. Long & Foster Real Estate, Inc. , 266 Va. 20 (2003): Virginia Supreme Court affirmed position asserted by Mr. Roche that the decision of an arbitration panel should be upheld.

IN RE EQ.B., AMERICAN FRIENDS OF CHILDREN, INC., 1617 A.2d 199 (D.C. Ct. of App. 1982): Action involving adoption agency.

We Handle:

Personal Injury - Car Accidents - Medical Malpractice - Product Liability / Defective Products - Premises Liability - Slip and Fall Accidents - Construction Accidents - Off Label Drug Injuries - Pedestrian Accidents - Bicycle Accidents - Motorcycle Accidents - Truck Accidents - Wrongful Death Claims

Serving:

Fairfax County, Fairfax City - Arlington, Alexandria -Loudoun County - Washington, D.C. - Maryland, Springfield - Burke, Oakton - Falls Church, McLean - Vienna, Reston, Herndon - Tysons Corner, Great Falls - Langley - Sterling - Leesburg Ashburn - Prince William County - Woodbridge